Effect of Different Foot Orthosis Inverted Angles on Plantar Pressure

NewsBot · Jul 29, 2016

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
The Effect of Different Foot Orthosis Inverted Angles on Plantar Pressure in Children with Flexible Flatfeet.
Bok SK et al
PLoS One. 2016 Jul 26;11(7):e0159831

Although orthotic modification using the inverted technique is available for the treatment of flatfoot, empirical evidence for the biomechanical effects of inverted-angle foot orthoses (FOs) is lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of different FO inversion angles on plantar pressure during gait in children with flatfoot. Twenty-one children with flexible flatfeet (mean age 9.9 years) were enrolled in this study. The plantar pressures were measured for the rearfoot; medial and lateral midfoot; and medial, central, and lateral forefoot as participants walked on a treadmill while wearing shoes only and shoes with the following 3 orthotic conditions: (i) orthosis with no inverted angle, (ii) orthosis with a 15? inverted angle, and (iii) orthosis with a 30? inverted angle. A one-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the Bonferroni-adjusted post-hoc test was used to compare the mean values of each orthotic condition. Compared with the shoe only condition, the peak pressure decreased significantly under the medial forefoot and rearfoot with all FOs (p <0.05). However, no significant differences in the peak pressure under the medial forefoot and rearfoot were observed between the FOs. The peak pressure under the medial midfoot increased significantly with all FOs, and a maximal increase in the peak pressure was obtained with a 30? inverted angle orthosis. Furthermore, the contact area under the medial midfoot and rearfoot increased significantly with all FOs, compared with the shoe only condition (p <0.05). Again, no significant differences were observed between the FOs. For plantar pressure redistribution, a FO with a low inverted angle could be effective, accommodative, and convenient for children with flatfoot.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jun 1, 2018

Effect produced on ground reaction forces by a prefabricated, weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing foot orthosis in the treatment of pronated foot: Pilot study.
Gijon-Nogueron G et al
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Jun;97(22):e10960.

BACKGROUND:
The aim of this study is to explore the changes in ground reaction force (GRF) produced by custom-made weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing foot orthoses and by a prefabricated foot orthosis, in the control of the pronated foot.

METHODS:
Thirty-nine participants were recruited. All were in good health, aged 18 to 25 years, and presented pronated foot. Three different types of foot orthosis were studied: prefabricated, weight-bearing, and nonweight-bearing.

RESULTS:
No significant differences were observed in the phases of the gait cycle between the prefabricated, the weight-bearing, and the nonweight-bearing foot orthoses.

CONCLUSIONS:
Neither prefabricated insoles nor custom-made orthoses (weight-bearing or nonweight-bearing) modified GRF.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jun 21, 2021

Effects of Different External Supports on Plantar Pressure-Time Integral and Contact Area in Flexible Flatfoot
Banu Ünver, Nilgün Bek
J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2021 May 1;111(3)

Background: Flexible flatfoot disturbs the load distribution of the foot. Various external supports are used to prevent abnormal plantar loading in flexible flatfoot. However, few studies have compared the effects of different external supports on plantar loading in flexible flatfoot. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of elastic taping, nonelastic taping, and custom-made foot orthoses on plantar pressure-time integral and contact area in flexible flatfoot.

Methods: Twenty-seven participants with flexible flatfoot underwent dynamic pedobarographic analysis while barefoot and with elastic tape, nonelastic tape, and custom-made foot orthoses.

Results: Pressure-time integral percentage was higher with foot orthoses than in the barefoot and taping conditions in the midfoot (P < .001) and was lower with foot orthoses than in barefoot in the right forefoot (P < .05). Pressure-time integral values were lower with foot orthoses in the second, third, and fourth metatarsals and the lateral heel (P < .05). With foot orthoses, contact area values were higher in the toes; second, third, and fourth metatarsi; midfoot; and heel compared with the other conditions (P < .05). Pressure-time integral in the right lateral heel and contact area in the left fourth metatarsal increased with nonelastic taping versus barefoot (P < .05).

Conclusions: Foot orthoses are more effective in providing dynamic pressure redistribution in flexible flatfoot. Although nonelastic taping has some effects, taping methods may be insufficient in altering the measured pedobarographic values in this condition.
Click to expand...

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Effects of different medial arch support heights on rearfoot kinematics

Effects of different midsole densities under the forefoot

Clinical effectiveness of different off-loading devices for the treatment of neuropathic foot ulcers

'Visualization' and the effects of different foot orthoses

Effectiveness of Different Types of Dressings

The effect of different running shoes on treadmill running mechanics and muscle activity

Cost Effectiveness of Different Techniques in Hallux Valgus Surgery

Share This Page